egafd.com

There's a case to be made for the early to mid-70s being a golden era for movies: a time when Nicolson, Pacino and De Niro were emerging as stars, and when Gene Hackman was probably the boss in the acting stakes. It's also possible to look at some of the no-brain shit being aimed at ideal audiences (or the US equivalent of Chavs, as the good Officer would say) and become depressed and disillusioned. But there are still some films being made by people who don't treat the audience as morons.

X-Men was by no means perfect, but it reinvigorated the comic book movie after the pish that was Batman And Robin almost killed off the genre. B&R and the almost equally bad Lost In Space were written by someone who amazingly won an Oscar a few years later (Akiva Goldman for A Beautiful Mind). The argument can be made that if people are left to write and produce and direct the films they want, an audience will find them; but that's not enough for Hollywood which depends on blockbusters and insists on films that follow a formula in the hope of achieving them.

It is possible to make a studio, crowd-pleasing film and make it entertaining without insulting the intelligence (Pirates Of The Caribbean, anyone?), but it takes more gonads than the average studio has.

Wasn't it the great Sam Goldwyn who asked his writers for some "new cliches"?

metro goldwyn meyer?louis b meyer?

We're back to art and commerce now. Modern movies often have the 16-25 male demograph in mind because they have the most disposable income (and are very easily parted with it), but you forget other audiences are out there too. The last decade has seen well-tailored children's films go through the roof (Potter/Pixar), and Titanic, which many thought would flop, tapped into that difficult teenage girl market (Leo! Leo! Leo!) to the tune of two billion. There are also the theorist successes: post 9/11 and the world wants to escape itself. Ticket to middle-earth then?

The problem, as you touch on, is where have all the adult films gone? They are still being made (for which Sight and Sound is indispensible) but do not have the same profile of old. Distributors, filling their theatres with months on end of the above-mentioned teen product, could perhaps take some of the blame, as many films of the more artistic/mature persuasion never make it outside the London arthouse circuit, and are thus doomed to dvd obscurity. Remember the more a film costs, the longer it needs to stay in circulation, and thus the FX giants pull rank. There is also the different opening methods - films used to go from region to region, building on word of mouth and reputation, whereas now a film hits thousands of screens worldwide instantly, clawing back its budget before word of mouth kills it.

The most common complaint in cinema-going is that Multiplexes simply do not offer the choice one would've expected from such a set-up, opting for four screens for Shrek 2 instead. This is where the real problem lies. They'll tell you it's demand, while conveniently ignoring the lesser (but no less important) demand elsewhere. Sad but true.

"Modern movies often have the 16-25 male demograph in mind because they have the most disposable income (and are very easily parted with it)"

Caught an article a few weeks ago that suggested it was the middle aged baby boomers (like me) who had the most disposable income and that canny marketers and ad agencies should be directing their efforts at us. Certainly I find that nowadays anything costing less that ?10k I can almost have on a whim. But I guess it's true that Chavey teenagers are more suggestible, open to hype, fashions and fads than the more mature amongst us, and consequently, easily parted from their disposable.

Teenage girl market - "difficult"? I would have thought that would be the easiest of the lot! You just get a tidy/pretty looking teenage lad/Chav off the street, give him an haircut with 'attitude' put a black leather jacket on him, fix up a photo shoot with 'Smash Hits' and 'Just 17' wangle an appearance on T.O.T.P's and 'Hey Presto!' just wait for the wedge to roll in.

Sounds like the multiplexes are adopting the commercial radio formula of only playing the middle of the road Chavey shit that is currently in the charts - lowest common denominator style. I think this is where the free market breaks down. The market for more adult/mature fare cannot grow if it is not promoted, advertised and talked about in the media and other public forums. But almost all those institutions want to talk about nowadays is 'Posh, Becks 'n' Jordan. Personally, I don't want to hear about those boring bastards or which other boring bastard?s party they attended and got smashed at last night. I'm totally not interested.


Officer Dibble

Nothing against FX and CGI, I love sci-fi 'n' fantasy and I hate the poncy 'serious film critic' attitude that a movie with this subject matter can never be taken seriously, or be worthy of an Oscar. Regrettably, most movies of these genres only seek to reinforce the film snob?s bigotry.

Regarding comic book films. For me, the best one to date has to be Tim Burton?s 'Batman 2' with Devito as The Penguin and Michelle Phiffer as Catwoman. It was a brilliantly heady brew - A dark, brooding, art deco vision of New York as 'Gotham City'. A troubled, complicated, hero (Batman) wrestling with the demons of his past. A gloriously repulsive 'Penguin' and the piece de resistance' ? Catwoman. A repressed (though beautiful) lady who, though a botched suicide attempt, gains cat-like powers. A lady with more depth and complexity than the hero himself, a lady who was going mad.

Not the kind of simplistic fare one normally feeds to Chavs, and a total contrast to the utter bilge that followed once Tim Burton had relinquished the helm.


Officer Dibble

'Certainly I find that nowadays anything costing less that ?10k I can almost have on a whim.'

Ooh, get you! Yes, I'd heard that about the baby boomer market too, though I don't think cinema plays up to this demograph to the degree of other culture/media, music especially. Perhaps it's a case of the 16-25 mentality that isn't being transcended, it being an impressionable age we all go through and one that often forms our tastes and preferences. In an age of youth-obsession, it's also a bracket many would like to return to, so why not do it on-screen?

But with the fine films you mentioned earlier (Chinatown/Godfather etc) there is another problem. These were all the product of vastly talented individuals who were allowed a lot of sway during the 60/70's US cinema revolution, and had a lot of control over the final cut. The studios simply don't work that way these days as the producers and promoters all take the upper hand during the initial deal-making stage, which they see as a necessity borne out of spiralling costs. The final cut is often their say, and they will dictate this whichever way they fancy, or however the pre-release preview audience has reacted, leading to films being messily cut and shaped for the most commercial appeal. Witness The Gangs of New York fiasco (and here was a film that perhaps had true greatness in its sights). A prime example of how it's all going wrong even with the old talent at hand.

AAH yes the formula looking for that all important 1 Blockbuster of the year

From the money side seems to be out of every 10 films
7 will lose money,2 will break even and 1 will pay for them all
as reported in a recent doco on the studios

cheers
B....OZ

Bimmercat wrote:

>
> (as one that owns several firearms, I can tell you that 90% of
> the things you see people do with guns in the movies is VERY
> incorrect or completely impossible)
>
> - Bimmercat

What ? You mean when the chicky-babe in thigh high boots and a bikini uses a huge machine gun to write her name into a police car door before jumping on a Harley and speeding off its not realistic ? Get out !